I don’t think Australia would use cricket grounds, other than the MCG (for sheer capacity/tradition, reasons) as the major cities have alternatives that would be more suitable.

Even so, I don’t think using a cricket ground is a major problem, I agree that the atmosphere isn’t as good, but it’s far more a norm in football than many people realise. I’ve been to see Bayern Munich at the Olympiastadion, host of the 1974 world cup final and 1988 euro final, and held wc and euro qualifiers up until 2002, and it’s further away from the action there than many cricket grounds. There are plenty of football stadiums with similar design as they have great capacity than rectangular stadiums.

The big problem is coming up with plans to get 12 stadiums that can accommodate over 40,000 by December, considering that many stadiums won’t be suitable due to being in the same city as a bigger stadium.

There is room for creativity though as many places are close to, but aren’t technically inside other cities, eg, Geelong isn’t in Melbourne, Central Coast isn’t in Sydney, and the Gold Coast isn’t in Brisbane.

England’s got a problem with their bid, as part of their bid seems to be based on the idea that it is their turn. That makes a lot of sense to the English, but not to anybody else, it’s already been pointed out they need to work on their bid.

Australia’s big advantage, is the bid will have a far more modern approach, and show an advantage in the development and promotion of the game. Australia will also have an advantage of evidence of a polished operation in general, as the very well recently conducted 2000 Olympics will count in Australia’s favour, and should reduce some of the speculation on what would need to be done to look after officials, players, media,etc.

This article is from a comment posted by Spel on Australia to bid for 2018 World Cup?